[Dr. Eckleburg]

Think about it, they're saying that without a limit on who can join their causes, there's no telling how someone will interpret the Scripture. I

I see you're relatively new. But FYI, it was because ROMAN CATHOLICS were having trouble on open threads that the "Caucus" label was even instituted.

ROMAN CATHOLICS wanted a place where they could talk among themselves and not be upset by any contrary information from Scripture or anyplace else.

[WPaCon]

I am pleasantly surprised that you referred to Catholics as Roman Catholics.

[Rashputin]

Well, isn’t that interesting. Protestants couldn’t leave people to talk among themselves and you acknowledge that fact.

Thanks for owning up to not being able to leave others alone, that’s the first step in doing better in the future.

Do you honestly think that when people are having a discussion that it is the contrary opinions rather than the huge blocks of graphics and blinking text that are the problem? My experience is quite the contrary, I don’t see anything other than the entire screens full of totally unrelated crap you have to scroll through as a problem.

I think the little games played whenever a Catholic makes a comment are way more than contrary information. If you can point out any discussion where a RC makes a point that isn’t in a Caucus and those graphics and diversion don’t appear I’d like to see it because I’ve sure missed it.

have a nice day

[HossB86]

ROMAN CATHOLICS wanted a place where they could talk among themselves and not be upset by any contrary information from Scripture or anyplace else.

Funny, isn't it? It's like the gawky kid that has to be seen AND heard. They don't want to be bothered, but that can't let others NOT be bothered.

Seems...well...odd. In a twisted sort of way.

Hoss

[daniel1212]

What i see as absurd is an RC inferring that they could somehow qualify as holding to sola scriptura. Esp. as RC apologists most typically but erroneously define SS as “solo scriptura, as if all but a few extremist hold that nothing else can be used except the Bible, rather than the Scriptures being the judge of all truth claims, and formally providing the truth needed for salvation and growth toward perfection. (2Tim. 3:15-17)

While there is some room for disagreement as to the difference btwn formal sufficiency and material sufficiency, sola Scriptura is a historical term, and it is clearly contrary to sola ecclesia, which is effectively the RC position. In which Scripture is held to come from Tradition, with the Magisterium coming from both, but as it presumes to define what both mean and the limits of the latter (not the former), then it is effectively the supreme authority.*

SS materially provides for the teaching magisterium, but holds that the Scriptures alone are the supreme objective authority, that being the only such that are wholly inspired of God. And which issue we have recently debated much.

As for the Sola Scriptura Caucus being a nonsensical designation due to what it may include/exclude, and the originators being the judge, it is a given that this does not refer to Vedic literature, just as it is a given that Catholic caucus does not include all who simply claim to be part of the universal church.

As for the likening it to “Whites Only” club, RCs do the same in their caucus, while the insistence to be part of something one opposes can be too much like a liberal rant, which shows the need for caucus type threads.

Moreover, the “alarming trend” seems to have been one thread, in which (if i recall) an RC objected to the RM’s exclusion of RCs, insolently inferring it was not valid because the RM referenced Wikipedia.

---

God Himself has set up a living authority to establish and teach the true and legitimate meaning of His heavenly revelation. This authority judges infallibly all disputes which concern matters of faith and morals, lest the faithful be swirled around by every wind of doctrine which springs from the evilness of men in encompassing error. - QUI PLURIBUS, (On Faith And Religion), Encyclical of Pope Pius IX, November 9, 1846

Catholic doctrine, as authoritatively proposed by the Church, should be held as the supreme law; for, seeing that the same God is the author both of the Sacred Books and of the doctrine committed to the Church, it is clearly impossible that any teaching can by legitimate means be extracted from the former, which shall in any respect be at variance with the latter. Hence it follows that all interpretation is foolish and false which either makes the sacred writers disagree one with another, or is opposed to the doctrine of the Church. - PROVIDENTISSIMUS DEUS, (On the Study of Holy Scripture), Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII dated

The Protestant goes directly to the Word of God for instruction, and to the throne of grace in his devotions; whilst the pious Roman Catholic consults the teaching of his church, and prefers to offer his prayers through the medium of the Virgin Mary and the saints. - http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12495a.htm